Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1458232387334.83073@netapp.com>
References: <D30F34AB.805E7%mattmann@apache.org>
 <2CF85773-AFF3-4AD8-99B1-CDC84FCCDF52@gmail.com>
 <D31004A1.8093C%chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
 <C7DD99FD-BA68-42A6-8DAF-C42CCFA2BA7E@gmail.com>
 <D3101E60.809CF%chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
 <1458230628650.83509@netapp.com>
 <D31025EE.80A30%chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
 <1458232387334.83073@netapp.com>
From: Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 17:42:56 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAGQtxvb+S2Vpt5UJT_v2CFcvHeoZ7ohsPd6zJkAmhnx+Daew8w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull
 request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114af8dcc13e56052e41533f

--001a114af8dcc13e56052e41533f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Chris,

I don't see how cloudstack/cloudstack can be a problem to the foudation
except for the PMC as they will be left with managing keeping it in sync.

I also don't see how a fork can be against apache policy as anyone is
allowed to fork the software at any time. We as PMC are no exception
(wisdom left out of the equation)

thirdly, As for the concern on whether these moves are done by 'part of the
PMC' or not: I think I can savely say I am one of the proponent of keeping
as much under the foundation umbrella as possible but I have hear no sounds
of anybody opposing the ongoing experiments.

I am happy to see board member mixing in our discussions from time to time.
Trying not to sound like I am complaining now, I wouldn't complain if it
happened a bit more often. BTW I have had problems adding an issue to
cloudstack/cloudstack as well, but I guess that's me not being a github
guru.

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Tutkowski, Mike <Mike.Tutkowski@netapp.com=
>
wrote:

> I see your concern, Chris.
>
> Yes, the community will continue to discuss. Hopefully others will join i=
n
> with their views.
> ________________________________________
> From: Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:16 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pul=
l
> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> Thank you. What you describe effectively below is going to
> implicitly switch the =E2=80=9Ccanonical=E2=80=9D repo in my opinion of t=
he
>
> repository to cloudstack/cloudstack. Merges that happen there,
> conversation that happens there on PRs and issues, labels, etc.,
> will be captured there and likely at increased pace and velocity,
> leaving the folks wanting to participate in the Apache Cloudstack
> project who aren=E2=80=99t part of cloudstack/cloudstack at a disadvantag=
e.
>
> Thanks for speaking up and looking forward to more discussion.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Tutkowski, Mike" <Mike.Tutkowski@netapp.com>
> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:03 AM
> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pul=
l
> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
>
> >As far as I understand, cloudstack/cloudstack is only being proposed to
> >help with developer workflow and CI.
> >
> >To my understanding, all code that goes in there will end up back in the
> >canonical ASF CloudStack repo (and, as such, be mirrored to
> >apache/cloudstack).
> >
> >This is simply a workaround to help solve developer workflow and CI
> >issues that we couldn't due to lack of privileges on the current repo.
> >
> >I do not believe anyone on the PMC is talking about forking CloudStack
> >and going off in a different direction.
> >________________________________________
> >From: Chris Mattmann <mattmann@apache.org>
> >Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:52 AM
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack
> >pull request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
> >
> >Hi Sebastien,
> >
> >
> >[..]
> >>>
> >>> Hi Sebastien,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for your reply and yes, I am a member of the ASF board.
> >>>
> >>> The thing is, there was already some discussion of this at the
> >>> ASF board meeting that happened yesterday. I can tell you that
> >>> there were more than a few board members that were a bit concerned
> >>> at the prospect of Apache Cloudstack forking and starting a new
> >>> GitHub organization, so I=E2=80=99m here now to discuss.
> >>
> >>We are not forking. In the sense that the canonical repo is at the ASF
> >>and mirrored on apache/cloudstack.
> >
> >OK, good though based on the rest of your replies, I actually see
> >the opposite being said. Also =E2=80=9Cwe=E2=80=9D is the relative word =
here, which
> >I=E2=80=99ll get back to later in this message.
> >
> >>
> >>The cloudstack org on github existed and was empty, one of us contacted
> >>github and we got the =E2=80=9Ccontrol=E2=80=9D of it.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I=E2=80=99m sorry that you are unhappy with the lack of access to Git=
Hub
> >>> facilities, however I=E2=80=99m confused, the ASF does provide mirror=
ing,
> >>> active GitHub issue,
> >>
> >>As far as I know we cannot use github issues.
> >>[..snip..]
> >>To close PRs you need to make a commit.
> >[..snip..]
> >>Be able to use labels
> >>Be able to setup our own triggers/hooks
> >
> >David Nalley can speak to this as I=E2=80=99m not sure if you can or
> >cannot or if infra@ is providing this. Thanks for stating this.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> PMC desires and if so can you state that? I remember seeing a request
> >>> that you wanted the ability to close pull requests and to be part of
> >>> the experiment going on with the Whimsy PMC -
> >>
> >>Indeed, and I (we) never heard back.
> >
> >Right - that=E2=80=99s probably b/c it wasn=E2=80=99t discussed with the=
 board
> >until our last meeting which just happened yesterday. It=E2=80=99s
> >my reading of the tea leaves that the experiment, while considered
> >going in the right direction with Whimsy, is not open to other
> >PMCs. It=E2=80=99s possible that we may as a board decide that further
> >response is needed, but until that happens or if that doesn=E2=80=99t ha=
ppen
> >you can take my response until then.
> >
> >>[..snip..]
> >
> >>
> >>> The other thing is - is the new Cloudstack GitHub organization the
> >>> result of a subset of the PMC going off and doing this -
> >>
> >>I am not sure why you say subset. Let=E2=80=99s try to avoid polemics.
> >
> >I=E2=80=99m not trying to attack.
> >
> >I asked a simple question - how many/who in the Apache CloudStack PMC
> >is intent on using this new Cloudstack GitHub organization? Not an
> >attack, a question that I still don=E2=80=99t have an answer to.
> >
> >I also wanted to gauge whether there are others on the PMC that will
> >speak up. I=E2=80=99ll continue waiting to hear more about that.
> >
> >>[..snip..]
> >>Again, this is not about leaving the ASF. This is about accessing
> >>productive tools and making use of them to their fullest.
> >>
> >>> Finally, as for the Apache Cloudstack PMC - for the PMC the policy of
> >>> the ASF is that the canonical repository at the moment is on ASF
> >>>hardware.
> >>
> >>And we would like the ASF to reconsider this.
> >
> >Put bluntly, the decision is no, and it is in the hands of the ASF Infra=
@
> >and based on
> >discussions I=E2=80=99ve seen on public lists there and on board@ and pa=
rt of the
> >board
> >meeting yesterday, Infra@ is not opening up the Whimsy experiment to
> other
> >PMCs
> >as of yet. They aren=E2=80=99t ready to declare an SLA; they aren=E2=80=
=99t ready for
> >potential
> >other PMCs to ask to use it too and for others to start thinking that
> >capability
> >is anything near operational. David Nalley can fill in more.
> >
> >>
> >>> There are not any approved policies for external forks being the
> >>>canonical
> >>> repo, especially those in another GitHub organization not managed by
> >>>the
> >>> ASF. There is an experiment in the Apache Whimsy PMC to experiment wi=
th
> >>> GitHub as the canonical repo for an apache/* org project. That is sti=
ll
> >>>an
> >>> experiment and not widely offered by ASF infra to all PMCs.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Are other projects than Whimsy being allowed to experiment ?
> >
> >Not at this time.
> >
> >>[..snip..]
> >>>
> >>
> >>And just to clarify, you are acting here as =E2=80=9Cthe board=E2=80=9D=
 ? Meaning the
> >>board asked you to get on dev@ and talk with our community after seeing
> >>our report ?
> >>I am asking because the PMC has not received an official response from
> >>the board based on our report (and annexed interim report).
> >
> >I am one of 9 Directors, but I believe if you=E2=80=99d like to test the=
 waters
> >that
> >I have support of other board members in asking these questions based on
> >the
> >meetings yesterday. And as one of the Directors of the board and a
> >long-time
> >ASF=E2=80=99er, I=E2=80=99m here also as a concerned member since some a=
ctions that I have
> >seen
> >by Cloudstack related to this GitHub external organization imply to me
> >that there
> >is something more than meets the eye here.
> >
> >Let=E2=80=99s keep discussing, hopefully with more participation from th=
e
> >community besides
> >the two of us.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Chris
> >
> >>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Chris
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com>
> >>> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> >>> Date: Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 3:15 AM
> >>> To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> >>> Subject: Re: External fork of Cloudstack (was Re: [GitHub] cloudstack
> >>>pull
> >>> request: Is the project attempting a fork on Githu...)
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Chris,
> >>>>
> >>>> We have never met but i recognize your name from members only ASF
> >>>>threads.
> >>>>
> >>>> For the benefit of others on this list it is useful to mention that
> >>>>you
> >>>> are a member of the ASF board.
> >>>>
> >>>> The PMC has filed its quarterly report  for march, as well as an
> >>>>interim
> >>>> report about a month ago. The interim report was acknowledged by Sam
> >>>>Ruby
> >>>> couple days ago only.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am assuming that the board will discuss it at its monthly meeting
> >>>>and
> >>>> that we will hear from the board then.
> >>>>
> >>>> Other than that the discussions are active on dev@ , but roughly we
> >>>>feel
> >>>> that we are being hurt by lack of access to github facilities.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>> -Sebastien
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 17 Mar 2016, at 00:04, Chris Mattmann <mattmann@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sorry about my crude way of filing a PR for this, but I heard
> >>>>> information about the Apache Cloudstack PMC actively
> >>>>> discussing managing the project with GitHub as the primary source
> >>>>> in a different organization than the github.com/apache/ org.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can someone clarify this for me? Clearly wearing my board hat,
> >>>>> this is not something we allow for any of our ASF projects.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>> Chris =E2=80=9Cboard hat on=E2=80=9D Mattmann
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>


--=20
Daan

--001a114af8dcc13e56052e41533f--